Convicted felons should not retain the right to vote

[WHO IS SERAFIN]

also, the right to vote is not a privilege, it's a constitutional right just like the right to bear arms, freedom of speech, the right to assembly and the freedom of religion... going to jail is not proof that one lacks the ability to vote...

The choice of the word "servitude" interacts intriguingly with the text of the Thirteenth Amendment. That is, "slavery" is prohibited, as is "involuntary servitude except as a punishment for crime." This language certainly foresaw that in the future, convicts might be put to hard labor, as indeed they were. (One recent book remembered the conditions in the 20th-century Parchman Farm prison in Mississippi as "worse than slavery.") But that kind of "servitude" is not mentioned in the Fifteenth Amendment; the omission suggests that conviction of crime in and of itself would not be an acceptable reason for restricting "the right to vote." Even convicted criminals must be afforded the right in its fullest extent.

In this reading, only felons actively serving prison terms could be barred from voting--their "condition of servitude" would be present, not "previous." The laborious process of civil-rights restoration imposed by many states (in 2010, one southern governor briefly proposed a requirement that every free felon write him a personal letter outlining his or her contributions to society) seems contrary not only to the spirit but also to the letter of the Fifteenth Amendment.

One can understand questions about felons on juries. But "the right of citizens of the United States to vote" is more strongly protected in the text than jury service. It is the only right in the Constitution to be protected in terms of "previous condition of servitude." These words demand that we give them a meaning commensurate with their extent.

source

Voting: Right or Privilege?

The Constitution mentions "the right to vote" five times. Judges, and voter ID law proponents, don't seem to be getting the hint

Like anything you loose that constitutional right if you break laws. You do not ever get back your 2nd amendment right in many cases if you go to jail committing certain crimes. Where are all the leftists screaming they did there time give that ex bank robber his gun back! I think Hypocrites would be a word to describe that.

see, there you go again, cherry-picking about the right to bear arms when that's not what we are discussing... i mentioned the right to bear arms only once because i was clearly naming some of the rights that all americans have under the constitution because the OP said that voting is a privilege, which is not correct... we are talking about the right to vote, and voting is not dangerous, voting is good not bad... stop trying to change the subject...

and on another note, give me proof that anyone, let alone a "leftist" is demanding to give guns to an ex bank robber? i think you're just making stuff up out of your ass to try to demonize democrats/liberals in a distasteful way... now, i can understand not giving bank robbers their guns back, but denying people their right to vote after they did their time is simply wrong... after-all, when people get out of jail/prison, do they need to get a job and do other things that everyone does? so, if you don't want to give people the benefit of the doubt, then i guess deny all criminals of a job so they can't feed themselves, right? that's what your logic is, right? and like i said, everyone makes bad choices and breaks the law, it's a matter of getting caught or not... just because people don't go to jail doesn't mean they never break the law or better at making choices than people that do get caught...

anyways, you're the type of person that screams out fraud when indeed you're in the business of fraud, i.e. strongly against marriage when you're in one... very logical...

So then you are saying someone who is convicted of of armed robbery goes to jail and completes there sentence should get there guns back. Hope it is yes because that H word will need to be used again. How above a child molester working in daycare after there jail sentence. Maybe a drunk driver who ran over people who did there jail sentence should drive again?

 

[+paradox]

also, the right to vote is not a privilege, it's a constitutional right just like the right to bear arms, freedom of speech, the right to assembly and the freedom of religion... going to jail is not proof that one lacks the ability to vote...

The choice of the word "servitude" interacts intriguingly with the text of the Thirteenth Amendment. That is, "slavery" is prohibited, as is "involuntary servitude except as a punishment for crime." This language certainly foresaw that in the future, convicts might be put to hard labor, as indeed they were. (One recent book remembered the conditions in the 20th-century Parchman Farm prison in Mississippi as "worse than slavery.") But that kind of "servitude" is not mentioned in the Fifteenth Amendment; the omission suggests that conviction of crime in and of itself would not be an acceptable reason for restricting "the right to vote." Even convicted criminals must be afforded the right in its fullest extent.

In this reading, only felons actively serving prison terms could be barred from voting--their "condition of servitude" would be present, not "previous." The laborious process of civil-rights restoration imposed by many states (in 2010, one southern governor briefly proposed a requirement that every free felon write him a personal letter outlining his or her contributions to society) seems contrary not only to the spirit but also to the letter of the Fifteenth Amendment.

One can understand questions about felons on juries. But "the right of citizens of the United States to vote" is more strongly protected in the text than jury service. It is the only right in the Constitution to be protected in terms of "previous condition of servitude." These words demand that we give them a meaning commensurate with their extent.

source

Voting: Right or Privilege?

The Constitution mentions "the right to vote" five times. Judges, and voter ID law proponents, don't seem to be getting the hint

Like anything you loose that constitutional right if you break laws. You do not ever get back your 2nd amendment right in many cases if you go to jail committing certain crimes. Where are all the leftists screaming they did there time give that ex bank robber his gun back! I think Hypocrites would be a word to describe that.

see, there you go again, cherry-picking about the right to bear arms when that's not what we are discussing... i mentioned the right to bear arms only once because i was clearly naming some of the rights that all americans have under the constitution because the OP said that voting is a privilege, which is not correct... we are talking about the right to vote, and voting is not dangerous, voting is good not bad... stop trying to change the subject...

and on another note, give me proof that anyone, let alone a "leftist" is demanding to give guns to an ex bank robber? i think you're just making stuff up out of your ass to try to demonize democrats/liberals in a distasteful way... now, i can understand not giving bank robbers their guns back, but denying people their right to vote after they did their time is simply wrong... after-all, when people get out of jail/prison, do they need to get a job and do other things that everyone does? so, if you don't want to give people the benefit of the doubt, then i guess deny all criminals of a job so they can't feed themselves, right? that's what your logic is, right? and like i said, everyone makes bad choices and breaks the law, it's a matter of getting caught or not... just because people don't go to jail doesn't mean they never break the law or better at making choices than people that do get caught...

anyways, you're the type of person that screams out fraud when indeed you're in the business of fraud, i.e. strongly against marriage when you're in one... very logical...

So then you are saying someone who is convicted of of armed robbery goes to jail and completes there sentence should get there guns back. Hope it is yes because that H word will need to be used again. How above a child molester working in daycare after there jail sentence. Maybe a drunk driver who ran over people who did there jail sentence should drive again?

again, you're trying to change the subject...

this is about voting, not guns, murders and rapists...

guns can be used in violent crimes but votes aren't violent...

 

[WHO IS SERAFIN]

also, the right to vote is not a privilege, it's a constitutional right just like the right to bear arms, freedom of speech, the right to assembly and the freedom of religion... going to jail is not proof that one lacks the ability to vote...

The choice of the word "servitude" interacts intriguingly with the text of the Thirteenth Amendment. That is, "slavery" is prohibited, as is "involuntary servitude except as a punishment for crime." This language certainly foresaw that in the future, convicts might be put to hard labor, as indeed they were. (One recent book remembered the conditions in the 20th-century Parchman Farm prison in Mississippi as "worse than slavery.") But that kind of "servitude" is not mentioned in the Fifteenth Amendment; the omission suggests that conviction of crime in and of itself would not be an acceptable reason for restricting "the right to vote." Even convicted criminals must be afforded the right in its fullest extent.

In this reading, only felons actively serving prison terms could be barred from voting--their "condition of servitude" would be present, not "previous." The laborious process of civil-rights restoration imposed by many states (in 2010, one southern governor briefly proposed a requirement that every free felon write him a personal letter outlining his or her contributions to society) seems contrary not only to the spirit but also to the letter of the Fifteenth Amendment.

One can understand questions about felons on juries. But "the right of citizens of the United States to vote" is more strongly protected in the text than jury service. It is the only right in the Constitution to be protected in terms of "previous condition of servitude." These words demand that we give them a meaning commensurate with their extent.

source

Voting: Right or Privilege?

The Constitution mentions "the right to vote" five times. Judges, and voter ID law proponents, don't seem to be getting the hint

Like anything you loose that constitutional right if you break laws. You do not ever get back your 2nd amendment right in many cases if you go to jail committing certain crimes. Where are all the leftists screaming they did there time give that ex bank robber his gun back! I think Hypocrites would be a word to describe that.

see, there you go again, cherry-picking about the right to bear arms when that's not what we are discussing... i mentioned the right to bear arms only once because i was clearly naming some of the rights that all americans have under the constitution because the OP said that voting is a privilege, which is not correct... we are talking about the right to vote, and voting is not dangerous, voting is good not bad... stop trying to change the subject...

and on another note, give me proof that anyone, let alone a "leftist" is demanding to give guns to an ex bank robber? i think you're just making stuff up out of your ass to try to demonize democrats/liberals in a distasteful way... now, i can understand not giving bank robbers their guns back, but denying people their right to vote after they did their time is simply wrong... after-all, when people get out of jail/prison, do they need to get a job and do other things that everyone does? so, if you don't want to give people the benefit of the doubt, then i guess deny all criminals of a job so they can't feed themselves, right? that's what your logic is, right? and like i said, everyone makes bad choices and breaks the law, it's a matter of getting caught or not... just because people don't go to jail doesn't mean they never break the law or better at making choices than people that do get caught...

anyways, you're the type of person that screams out fraud when indeed you're in the business of fraud, i.e. strongly against marriage when you're in one... very logical...

So then you are saying someone who is convicted of of armed robbery goes to jail and completes there sentence should get there guns back. Hope it is yes because that H word will need to be used again. How above a child molester working in daycare after there jail sentence. Maybe a drunk driver who ran over people who did there jail sentence should drive again?

again, you're trying to change the subject...

this is about voting, not guns, murders and rapists...

guns can be used in violent crimes but votes aren't violent...

I am just using your own arguement and running with it. And it is a good one. You are willing to give people who broke the law that was bad enough to put them in jail by trial to vote and be a part of possibly changing everyones lives for the worse then you should be more then willing to let child molesters teach little kids. And people who use guns on innocent people be allowed to have them again. Anything less in that opinion is a hypocrite.

 

[+paradox]

haha, you're funny here...

you can't debate what i say because you can't then you go make up things and change the subject... we don't generalize things up like that liberty... we use common sense with each case and situation... if someone uses a gun to commit a crime then the state should look at that case to see if that person shouldn't have a legal right to own a firearm, it only makes sense... and it also makes sense to not let rapists to teach or be around kids... which all is already laws and restrictions... letting people that have did their time have the right to vote is not even in the same ballpark, totally different because voting doesn't cause physical harm to a person... votes are harmless... now you trying to say only felons vote "wrong" or would vote to make everything worse for everyone is just something you pulled out of your ass and have no substance to it, totally false and incorrect... and you should be ashamed of yourself by assuming if all felons had the right to vote they would make things worse... that's so ignorant to say and i thought you would be way bigger than that... now in most states, they do allow some felons to get some of their rights back including their right to vote...

on a side note, americans that have no felonies are the majority voters, look what america has turned into, and now you're saying if america would let all felons have the right to vote after they do their full sentence then america would turn into a crap hole? how can felons make america even worse then it is now?

 

[WHO IS SERAFIN]

haha, you're funny here...

you can't debate what i say because you can't then you go make up things and change the subject... we don't generalize things up like that liberty... we use common sense with each case and situation... if someone uses a gun to commit a crime then the state should look at that case to see if that person shouldn't have a legal right to own a firearm, it only makes sense... and it also makes sense to not let rapists to teach or be around kids... which all is already laws and restrictions... letting people that have did their time have the right to vote is not even in the same ballpark, totally different because voting doesn't cause physical harm to a person... votes are harmless... now you trying to say only felons vote "wrong" or would vote to make everything worse for everyone is just something you pulled out of your ass and have no substance to it, totally false and incorrect... and you should be ashamed of yourself by assuming if all felons had the right to vote they would make things worse... that's so ignorant to say and i thought you would be way bigger than that... now in most states, they do allow some felons to get some of their rights back including their right to vote...

on a side note, americans that have no felonies are the majority voters, look what america has turned into, and now you're saying if america would let all felons have the right to vote after they do their full sentence then america would turn into a crap hole? how can felons make america even worse then it is now?

I can argue it just fine you just are making no sense when you took it off course trying to make something up where I changed my mind on the subject when you have not proven any such thing.

We sure should generalize on such things and do. And voting is not harmless it has the potential and does hurt millions if we choose wrong. It is the most dangerous right of them all and should not be given out to people who have done serious crimes willy nilly. So it seems you are thinking hypocritical on the subject.

Things can always get worse as bad as it is and letting people who could not follow our more serious laws is not a solution.

 

[Ellie1142545]

Felons.....Meaning Robbers, murderer's, terrorist, those who used weapons in crimes, are not trust worthy, and by law, are not allowed to vote.....And I tend to agree with this law...By taking rights away, from the people they attack, or harm, why should they be allowed to have those rights, they've taken away from others?

I also believe that illegal immigrants should not be allowed to vote....Although, they were allowed to vote on the last election, it was wrong.....I just hope they won't be allowed to vote on the next Presidential Election....

Those with misdemeanor's, and who really hasn't done something misdemeanor? We're all guilty of this....Only some got caught, and some never.....They should be allowed to vote, and as far as I know, they do vote....

 

[WHO IS SERAFIN]

By taking rights away, from the people they attack, or harm, why should they be allowed to have those rights, they've taken away from others?

I like this quote a lot. I may borrow it some day in the future.

 

[+paradox]

because not all crimes are serious and violent...

there's already laws against major felons state to state that revoke voting rights for life, and some offenses, people may have the option/opportunity to get their voting right back... why is that a bad thing?

now you're wanting to restrict the felons that did minor/non-violent offenses to ever have the chance to get their voting rights back? i think that's too harsh...

obviously, you have too much anger inside of you or that you're too deep and into politics that it turned you into a lifeless robot that's not remorseful or forgiving...

your posted quote just got squashed...

 

[WHO IS SERAFIN]

because not all crimes are serious and violent...

there's already laws against major felons state to state that revoke voting rights for life, and some offenses, people may have the option/opportunity to get their voting right back... why is that a bad thing?

now you're wanting to restrict the felons that did minor/non-violent offenses to ever have the chance to get their voting rights back? i think that's too harsh...

obviously, you have too much anger inside of you or that you're too deep and into politics that it turned you into a lifeless robot that's not remorseful or forgiving...

your posted quote just got squashed...

We are not talking about all crimes. We are talking about crimes bad enough to put you in jail by a trial of your peers. That means more then likely someone innocent suffered from that crime.

It's not about anger it is about common sense.

 

[+paradox]

that's already in place, holy crap how can you demand something that's already in place?

obviously, you haven't read my last post...

again you have no idea what you're talking about because you can go to trail with any charge and be found guilty in a court of law by your peers/jury... doesn't mean said crime is a felony or a serious crime...

common sense? in this case you have none...

you're hopeless...

 

[Ellie1142545]

because not all crimes are serious and violent...

there's already laws against major felons state to state that revoke voting rights for life, and some offenses, people may have the option/opportunity to get their voting right back... why is that a bad thing?

now you're wanting to restrict the felons that did minor/non-violent offenses to ever have the chance to get their voting rights back? i think that's too harsh...

obviously, you have too much anger inside of you or that you're too deep and into politics that it turned you into a lifeless robot that's not remorseful or forgiving...

your posted quote just got squashed...

I'm with you on this....Those laws cover felons, who used weapons, in the commission of the crime.....And the Law denies them the right to vote....

Those who commit a crime, without the use of a weapon, said crimes are minor, and the majority of them are misdemeanors. Their right to vote should not be taken away.

As for those who commit a felony, without the use of firearms, varies from stat to state, and deals mostly with thefts, and drugs......In Nebraska, once they've served the time, and are no longer on probation/parole, they're voting rights are returned to them.....

But those felons that use violence, as far as I'm concerned they lost their rights.....

 

[WHO IS SERAFIN]

that's already in place, holy crap how can you demand something that's already in place?

obviously, you haven't read my last post...

again you have no idea what you're talking about because you can go to trail with any charge and be found guilty in a court of law by your peers/jury... doesn't mean said crime is a felony or a serious crime...

common sense? in this case you have none...

you're hopeless...

Demand what? We are talking about restoring rights. If you are going to restore one of our most important rights to felons and worse then it needs to be all of them like carrying guns and such or people are hypocrite


Please we have so many posts on this we are talking about serious crimes that get you sent to jail. Don't try and twist it because out of a dozen posts I left out a word.


Yes common sense.

 

[+paradox]

that's already in place, holy crap how can you demand something that's already in place?

obviously, you haven't read my last post...

again you have no idea what you're talking about because you can go to trail with any charge and be found guilty in a court of law by your peers/jury... doesn't mean said crime is a felony or a serious crime...

common sense? in this case you have none...

you're hopeless...

Demand what? We are talking about restoring rights. If you are going to restore one of our most important rights to felons and worse then it needs to be all of them like carrying guns and such or people are hypocrite


Please we have so many posts on this we are talking about serious crimes that get you sent to jail. Don't try and twist it because out of a dozen posts I left out a word.


Yes common sense.

like how you're totally against government handouts but support the church tax exemptions?

see, i can do it too...

or how about if someone get one ticket while driving then you should be stripped of your driving privileges, since you can't obey they law and can't have second chances... have you ever gotten a ticket situation and plead guilty of it liberty?

 

[WHO IS SERAFIN]

that's already in place, holy crap how can you demand something that's already in place?

obviously, you haven't read my last post...

again you have no idea what you're talking about because you can go to trail with any charge and be found guilty in a court of law by your peers/jury... doesn't mean said crime is a felony or a serious crime...

common sense? in this case you have none...

you're hopeless...

Demand what? We are talking about restoring rights. If you are going to restore one of our most important rights to felons and worse then it needs to be all of them like carrying guns and such or people are hypocrite


Please we have so many posts on this we are talking about serious crimes that get you sent to jail. Don't try and twist it because out of a dozen posts I left out a word.


Yes common sense.

like how you're totally against government handouts but support the church tax exemptions?

see, i can do it too...

or how about if someone get one ticket while driving then you should be stripped of your driving privileges, since you can't obey they law and can't have second chances... have you ever gotten a ticket situation and plead guilty of it liberty?

First is apples and oranges. What we are talking about is not. And tax exemptions is not freebies if they are providing a service of charity for a community.

And never suggested in any way that a minor traffic violation should strip you of your driving privileges.